Im Making An (1) Train Schedule

[RailRunRob]

YES, we do. We need express service for us riders who live in the northern part of the line near the terminals. 

I've used the from 242nd for 1st 20 years of my life I know the line. 27 mins for over 7 miles (242-96th) Let's compare that with a slower local like the just over 7 miles at 36 mins to South Ferry. True there closer opportunities for express connections with the but as stated before geography and track layout affect these possibilities or at least it's effectiveness. I'm sure they would have preferred a thru middle track. But blasting thru cliffs and digging 100 plus feet underground come on that's a feat!  I guess I would also look to history for possibilities was there ever an Upper Broadway Express? in the lines the line's 109-year history? SkipStop we know what happened there. Also here are all the Bronx line'S and their runtime to 96/86 from their terminals.

 

 

27 mins to 96

46 mins to 96

31 mins to 86  (26m/125th)

40 mins to 86  via Exp Nereid (35m/125th)

  37 mins to 86 via Express Dyre (33m/125th)

 39 mins to 86 via Local Dyre

33 mins to 96 via Pelham express

 35 mins to 96 via Pelham Local

29mins to 96th 

 

Show where the is a special case?

Edited March 20, 2017 by RailRunRob

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I've used the from 242nd for 1st 20 years of my life I know the line. 27 mins for over 7 miles (242-96th) Let's compare that with a slower local like the just over 7 miles at 36 mins to South Ferry. True there closer opportunities for express connections with the but as stated before geography and track layout affect these possibilities or at least it's effectiveness. I'm sure they would have preferred a thru middle track. But blasting thru cliffs and digging 100 plus feet underground come on that's a feat!  I guess I would also look to history for possibilities was there ever an Upper Broadway Express? in the lines the line's 109-year history? SkipStop we know what happened there. Also here are all the Bronx line and their runtime to 96/86 from their terminals.

 

 

27 mins to 96

46 mins to 96

31 mins to 86  (26m/125th)

40 mins to 86  via Exp Nereid (35m/125th)

  37 mins to 86 via Express Dyre (33m/125th)

 39 mins to 86 via Local Dyre

33 mins to 96 via Pelham express

 35 mins to 96 via Pelham Local

29mins to 96th 

 

Show where the is a special case?

I'm sorry but things change. You used the train how many years ago when service on the line was better? I used to use the line when I first started working in my early 20's in Manhattan, and back then the was great. Now despite the high frequencies, service is a lot slower and less reliable. As the population continues to boom along the line, the status quo can't continue. It's another example of the not doing more to improve the system.

[RailRunRob]

I'm sorry but things change. You used the train how many years ago when service on the line was better? I used to use the line when I first started working in my early 20's in Manhattan, and back then the was great. Now despite the high frequencies, service is a lot slower and less reliable. As the population continues to boom along the line, the status quo can't continue. It's another example of the not doing more to improve the system.

I hear you. And I'm not saying you guys are wrong but there are rules and limits to infrastructure. Trains run on rails correct? What are we saying exactly? These aren't exactly unique issues same fluid dynamics issues you have with Highways if you have over 1500 cars per hour per lane guess what the Avg speed drops from 55 to 40 butterfly effect. Again the MTA Inherited this from the IRT. I mean you should demand better service What's your plan to fix it? From an Engineering/ Engineer perspective, I don't understand your point. How do you free this service from its limitations?  

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I hear you. And I'm not saying you guys are wrong but there are rules and limits to infrastructure. Trains run on rails correct? What are we saying exactly? These aren't exactly unique issues same fluid dynamics issues you have with Highways if you have over 1500 cars per hour per lane guess what the Avg speed drops from 55 to 40 butterfly effect. Again the MTA Inherited this from the IRT. I mean you should demand better service What's your plan to fix it? From an Engineering/ Engineer perspective, I don't understand your point. How do you free this service from its limitations?  

Simple. You come up with something bold. As was discussed, a long-term solution is needed, and I would look at how a single track could be put in for express service.  I'm still not clear as to why that was only done in part of the line north of 96th street?  What were they hoping to achieve with such a set up?  My understanding is that it can't be done, but where does the single track run again and where doesn't it run?

[RailRunRob]

Simple. You come up with something bold. As was discussed, a long-term solution is needed, and I would look at how a single track could be put in for express service.  I'm still not clear as to why that was only done in part of the line north of 96th street?  What were they hoping to achieve with such a set up?  My understanding is that it can't be done, but where does the single track run again and where doesn't it run?

Bold huh?.. Bold I like your style... Well as I said before I think they were trying to achieve not dying and cutting through some of the hardest rock in the world here... There were no modern TBM's in 1900-06 give them some credit looking at the and it's setup north of 168th the IND couldn't get the job done 25 years later even with the huge jump in technology. So to answer that they didn't have a choice Quite frankly we're  lucky to have two tracks we got.  BM5 had the most sound plan I heard but it's not without holes.

242, Dyckman. Merge with traffic 191,181,168,157,145(sb) Middle Merge south of 103rd > 96th.

 

 

Even with that how much time are you really saving? I think of the at Jackson ave. When I  saved 4-5 mins on the run but lost it with the Congestion going into 3rd Ave. With this plan, 96th would be the bottleneck. People transferring your losing seconds there holding doors etc. I could see backups near 103rd I'm not sure how the signaling blocks are setup. But I'm sure it's going to be a pain.. 238th as well with Train's needing to cross over the middle to get to the yard.  The time you gain you'd lose with the merges you'd gain zero. or 1-3 mins tops. Is that worth it?

Do you create a 3rd track? under the existing two? that's bold but then you skip the stops with the ridership not to mention astronomical costs. CBTC maybe? Could squeeze a few more trains in at least 20 years out no new bandwidth added.

Maybe extend the to the Bronx? That would add another line to offset the crowding more bandwidth. Short jump to the Bronx.

Take your pick.  Any of these are not just a MTA thing is the MTA,State and Feds.

http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/caption.pl?/img/trackmap/pm_west.png

 

 

Trackmap

Edited March 20, 2017 by RailRunRob

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Bold huh?.. Bold I like your style... Well as I said before I think they were trying to achieve not dying and cutting through some of the hardest rock in the world here... There were no modern TBM's in 1900-06 give them some credit looking at the and it's setup north of 168th the IND couldn't get the job done 25 years later even with the huge jump in technology. So to answer that they didn't have a choice Quite frankly we're  lucky to have two tracks we got.  BM5 had the most sound plan I heard but it's not without holes.

242, Dyckman. Merge with traffic 191,181,168,157,145(sb) Middle Merge south of 103rd > 96th.

 

 

Even with that how much time are you really saving? I think of the at Jackson ave. When I  saved 4-5 mins on the run but lost it with the Congestion going into 3rd Ave. With this plan, 96th would be the bottleneck. People transferring your losing seconds there holding doors etc. I could see backups near 103rd I'm not sure how the signaling blocks are setup. But I'm sure it's going to be a pain.. 238th as well with Train's needing to cross over the middle to get to the yard.  The time you gain you'd lose with the merges you'd gain zero. or 1-3 mins tops. Is that worth it?

Do you create a 3rd track? under the existing two? that's bold but then you skip the stops with the ridership not to mention astronomical costs. CBTC maybe? Could squeeze a few more trains in at least 20 years out no new bandwidth added.

Maybe extend the to the Bronx? That would add another line to offset the crowding more bandwidth. Short jump to the Bronx.

Take your pick.  Any of these are not just a MTA thing is the MTA,State and Feds.

http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/caption.pl?/img/trackmap/pm_west.png

 

 

Trackmap

There needs to be something done to address the crowding that exists from 116th on. In most cases, by the time you're at Cathedral Parkway, the train is a sardine can, and at 103rd, you may be flagging people. This is in 2017.  What happens if the status quo remains? That's why I favor some sort of express service, this way you alleviate that overcrowding down there, and the folks further north get down to 96th faster. The other obvious option seems to have more trains starting at 137th. They're already doing this but I don't they have enough of those trains in place. 

[Around the Horn]

There needs to be something done to address the crowding that exists from 116th on. In most cases, by the time you're at Cathedral Parkway, the train is a sardine can, and at 103rd, you may be flagging people. This is in 2017.  What happens if the status quo remains? That's why I favor some sort of express service, this way you alleviate that overcrowding down there, and the folks further north get down to 96th faster. The other obvious option seems to have more trains starting at 137th. They're already doing this but I don't they have enough of those trains in place. 

 

This is where rolling stock comes in... I don't think we have enough cars available unless you get creative with the runs and start using spare or trains for a round trip or two...

 

Apart from that, your idea seems sound...

[RailRunRob]

This is where rolling stock comes in... I don't think we have enough cars available unless you get creative with the runs and start using spare or trains for a round trip or two...

 

Apart from that, your idea seems sound...

 

There needs to be something done to address the crowding that exists from 116th on. In most cases, by the time you're at Cathedral Parkway, the train is a sardine can, and at 103rd, you may be flagging people. This is in 2017.  What happens if the status quo remains? That's why I favor some sort of express service, this way you alleviate that overcrowding down there, and the folks further north get down to 96th faster. The other obvious option seems to have more trains starting at 137th. They're already doing this but I don't they have enough of those trains in place. 

 

Indeed. Okay, would you need express service if you could have more short turns at 137th? My next question would be if you had the needed cars how hard of an operation would it be to do these short turns? In my mind, there's always a metronome of 3mins A constant timer that service fit's into. Could you not cause backups? And would this effect headway's further upstream?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Indeed. Okay, would you need express service if you could have more short turns at 137th? My next question would be if you had the needed cars how hard of an operation would it be to do these short turns? In my mind, there's always a metronome of 3mins A constant timer that service fit's into. Could you not cause backups? And would this effect headway's further upstream?

Well here's the thing.  You already have some trains running "express" unofficially due to overcrowding and being delayed, so people are already being passed up.  I've been quite a few trains that ran express from 137th to 96th. How effectively it could be done is anyone's guess, but they're already doing it to some degree. 

 

This is where rolling stock comes in... I don't think we have enough cars available unless you get creative with the runs and start using spare or trains for a round trip or two...

 

Apart from that, your idea seems sound...

I suppose so, but I think this has to be looked at down the road.  We need a gap filler and a long-term solution as well.

[RailRunRob]

Well here's the thing.  You already have some trains running "express" unofficially due to overcrowding and being delayed, so people are already being passed up.  I've been quite a few trains that ran express from 137th to 96th. How effectively it could be done is anyone's guess, but they're already doing it to some degree. 

 

I suppose so, but I think this has to be looked at down the road.  We need a gap filler and a long-term solution as well.

Indeed.. I've been on a few as well. It's great flexibility to be able to do that when needed. I kinda look at it as a "Get out of jail free card" using it a few times to get service back on track great. It's a bit different than having thru express service and using it regularly. You no longer have the open lane in case of Emergencies. Plus if going to shorturn at 137 you'd be using that lane correct? I'm I looking at it wrong correct me if I'm wrong.

Edited March 20, 2017 by RailRunRob

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Indeed.. I've been on a few as well. It's great flexibility to be able to do that when needed. I kinda look at it as a "Get out of jail free card" using it a few times to get service back on track great. It's a bit different than having thru express service and using it regularly. You no longer have the open lane in case of Emergencies. Plus if going to shorturn at 137 you'd be using that lane correct? I'm I looking at it wrong correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, I mean I'm under the impression that they use that single track now where possible anyway. I would just make more use of it of course assuming you could continue that track where needed to 242nd.  It would allow for much more flexibility.  Another question... Can those trains come in on the track where the three lines stop at 96th street?  Have wondered about that.  That perhaps could be used where necessary too.  From what I witness there are more trains in comparison to the trains so you could perhaps address any bottle necking from the that way.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Lawrence St]

As I say, it's either bring back the or have <1> service.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

As I say, it's either bring back the or have <1> service.

And before such service returns, a study should be run to further understand ridership patterns and how to use such service to provide the most impact.  I'm of the belief that you could run express service from 137th to 96th if you could have more trains starting at 137th.  

[RailRunRob]

Yeah, I mean I'm under the impression that they use that single track now where possible anyway. I would just make more use of it of course assuming you could continue that track where needed to 242nd.  It would allow for much more flexibility.  Another question... Can those trains come in on the track where the three lines stop at 96th street?  Have wondered about that.  That perhaps could be used where necessary too.  From what I witness there are more trains in comparison to the trains so you could perhaps address any bottle necking from the that way.

As for 96th there are switches north of the station but would be on the express lineup until switches south of Times square. Plus the time it takes to set the lineup and switch over. You'd have a 2 or 3 backed up around 91st.

 

And before such service returns, a study should be run to further understand ridership patterns and how to use such service to provide the most impact.  I'm of the belief that you could run express service from 137th to 96th if you could have more trains starting at 137th.  

 

Solve for X do you foresee backups?

Edited March 20, 2017 by RailRunRob

[Via Garibaldi 8]

As for 96th there are switches north of the station but would be on the express lineup until switches south of Times square. Plus the time it takes to set the lineup and switch over. You'd have a 2 or 3 backed up around 91st.

 

 

Solve for X do you foresee backups?

I'm just trying to understand where the single track comes into play...

[Lawrence St]

Let's break down as smart as we can:

 

The does not have a single express station on the entire stretch from 242nd down to 96th Street, excluding the portion between Dyckman and 137th Street since there is no express track. This means the only way express service would work is if you do skip stop.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Let's break down as smart as we can:

 

The does not have a single express station on the entire stretch from 242nd down to 96th Street, excluding the portion between Dyckman and 137th Street since there is no express track. This means the only way express service would work is if you do skip stop.

I'm confused.  Aren't there three tracks at 137th??  In short, my understanding is that there are three tracks from 242nd down to??? Not quite clear on that.

[P3F]

Let's break down as smart as we can:

 

The does not have a single express station on the entire stretch from 242nd down to 96th Street, excluding the portion between Dyckman and 137th Street since there is no express track. This means the only way express service would work is if you do skip stop.

Skip stop is certainly not the only option here.

[Lawrence St]

I'm confused. Aren't there three tracks at 137th?? In short, my understanding is that there are three tracks from 242nd down to??? Not quite clear on that.

At 137th they merge back into three tracks because the Northbound track becomes the express track and the northbound branches off into a new track south of 137th

[P3F]

I'm confused.  Aren't there three tracks at 137th??  In short, my understanding is that there are three tracks from 242nd down to??? Not quite clear on that.

There are two tracks at 242 Street.

 

South of 242 Street, a center track forms, and runs until just south of 207th Street, when it merges into the local tracks.

 

Dyckman, 191, 181, 168, and 157 Street stations only have two local tracks.

 

At 145 Street, a center track forms but it is only connected to the northbound track north of the station, meaning all southbound trains (local or express) need to stop there. There is a full set of switches south of 145 Street.

 

The center track runs from 145 Street to just south of 103 Street, where it merges into the two local tracks. Then, the express join the local tracks from the Central Park tunnel, and there are switches allowing trains to cross over between the local and express tracks before entering 96 Street.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

At 137th they merge back into three tracks because the Northbound track becomes the express track and the northbound branches off into a new track south of 137th

 

 

There are two tracks at 242 Street.

 

South of 242 Street, a center track forms, and runs until just south of 207th Street, when it merges into the local tracks.

 

Dyckman, 191, 181, 168, and 157 Street stations only have two local tracks.

 

At 145 Street, a center track forms but it is only connected to the northbound track north of the station, meaning all southbound trains (local or express) need to stop there. There is a full set of switches south of 145 Street.

 

The center track runs from 145 Street to just south of 103 Street, where it merges into the two local tracks. Then, the express join the local tracks from the Central Park tunnel, and there are switches allowing trains to cross over between the local and express tracks before entering 96 Street.

Interesting.  Now I see the issues.  I don't get why they didn't just continue the three tracks throughout?  I understand the engineering problems, but hey if you could get two tracks in, why not go for three?  Given how deep some of the stations are, it would be a serious challenge to expand them to get in a third track, aside from other things.  I think long term though, this has to be looked at, so that you could at least provide peak express service.  I don't know how you do it exactly (perhaps you have a study to see the feasibility of such an expansion - I think it would've easier to have done it from the start versus now), but they're obviously doing something at the moment with the line being knocked out almost entirely on weekends.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Lawrence St]

When the (1)'s only running to 14th they're doing work at Cortlandt St and South Ferry. When the isn't running at all, they're doing work down there as well up in the Bronx, replacing track and catwalks and whatnot.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

When the (1)'s only running to 14th they're doing work at Cortlandt St and South Ferry. When the isn't running at all, they're doing work down there as well up in the Bronx, replacing track and catwalks and whatnot.

Yeah, as I figured...  There aren't any long term improvements going on though aside from that, right? That's the other thing.  I have to think they're going to need to do some serious work at some point to overhead parts along Broadway.  Maybe then they could explore the possibility of the third track.

[RailRunRob]

Yeah, as I figured...  There aren't any long term improvements going on though aside from that, right? That's the other thing.  I have to think they're going to need to do some serious work at some point to overhead parts along Broadway.  Maybe then they could explore the possibility of the third track.

You don't you think a 3rd track would skip a lot of the higher ridership stations? 168th,145,137,116th?  Do you think the could be worked or extended to help the out?

Let's break down as smart as we can:

 

The does not have a single express station on the entire stretch from 242nd down to 96th Street, excluding the portion between Dyckman and 137th Street since there is no express track. This means the only way express service would work is if you do skip stop.

Not the way Skip Stop works. 

Edited March 20, 2017 by RailRunRob

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You don't you think a 3rd track would skip a lot of the higher ridership stations? 168th,145,137,116th?  Do you think the could be worked or extended to help the out?

You can run such a service and have some trains start at 137th. I honestly would prefer 145th because that's where the trains start to become crowded.  If the track configuration could be reworked, I would have more trains start there.   The needs some work too, but I'm not so sure about an extension.  Express service has become pathetic.  The delays and the trains that crawl... You're better off taking the .